On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Christopher A. Williams <chriswfedora@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > A. I was unaware of the vmware-update-2.6.27-5.5.7-2 patch. Last time I > > checked (~1.5 months ago) only the any-to-any patch was available and it > > didn't support kernels >= 2.6.26. > > B. Much like the any-to-any patch, (and at least according to google) > > this patch is unofficial. > > C. As I previously said, -officially-, VMWare doesn't support Fedora. > > [1] > > D. As you recall, the OP asked if can send a BZ about his SELinux > > problems in bugzilla.redhat.com - my original answer was rather simple: > > VMware is proprietary and closed source, and doesn't officially support > > Fedora. > > > > [1] VMWare server, user's guide, page 26. > > As the OP, I would say your response was a little touchier than that. > Moreover, it did not even approach being helpful. In the context I > originally asked, it doesn't matter that VMware doesn't officially > support Fedora. If it were, I would have escalated it with VMware, > especially since I have access to special support that many who use > VMware don't. My answer might have been too aggressive - Sorry for that. However, I've already tried contacting VMware concerning their problematic Fedora / upstream support (Either using their Forums [as a private client] and as an enterprise user) and in both cases, their the people that I spoke with gave me the company line - read: RHEL and SLES only. > Lots of stuff, both open source and proprietary, isn't supported on > Fedora by their respective vendors, but that doesn't stop people on the > Fedora team from figuring out how to make it work. That also goes for > VMware. I also know that they would be interested in documenting a fix > for this problem. Problem is - I'm not sure that we should - and I'm not talking about the close vs. open source problem. Seems to me that VMWare is treating Linux users (especially non RHEL/SLES users) as free-loaders. E.g. - VMware's refusal to issue official vmnet/vmmon kernel driver patches (as opposed to the 3'rd party any-to-any patches). - Broken RPMs (Missing reqs) that are being ignored. - GTK hacks in their console, that semi-work on anything >= Fedora 8. - VMWare's VI client is Windows only. Want Linux host? Use the (@#%@%) web client. - etc. I don't really like VirtualBox - but compare VBOX's Fedora support to VMWare's (Specific RPM for each Fedora release), and you'll understand my point. Last and not least, the OP (at least the message I saw) was talking about VMWare Server 2.x which had a known issue with PAM [1] and SELinux (...) that didn't really seem to get VMWare's attention. When I tried getting support (mind you, at the time we were thinking about spending a lot of money on ESX - for me the VMWare Server 2.x deployment was just testing purpose) - I got the ever-annoying-company line - we only support RHEL and SLES.... > The original question was if anyone on the Fedora team knew of status of > any potential fix (BZ or not - but I didn't mention BZ). Fortunately, > someone does care enough to look into it (thanks Daniel Walsh). I missed the OM. I only saw the one that I answered to. > I'll send what I find with F10 and the latest Server 2.0 build this > weekend... Well, as you understand, my experience with - Gilboa [1] http://tommi.org/2008/09/vmware-server-20-and-fedora-9/ -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
